Soteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
Warren McGrew, the Idol Killer, is back to discuss his debate with Arminian, Dan Chapa, over the doctrine of Total Depravity (Inability). To see the original debate, go here: To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about? https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22/is-calvinism-all-you-talk-about/ DOWNLOAD OUR APP: LINK FOR ANDROIDS: ... LINK FOR APPLE: ... Go to www.ridgemax.co for all you software development needs! Show them...
info_outlineSoteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
James White tweeted a post yesterday that implied Clement of Rome's letter to Corinth demonstrated a "Calvinistic" understanding of election. Was Clement of Rome a Calvinist because he used the word "elect" a lot? No. He talked about election the same way the other early church fathers did in their writings. To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about? https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22/is-calvinism-all-you-talk-about/ DOWNLOAD OUR APP: LINK...
info_outlineSoteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
Dr. Leighton Flowers responds to Calvinists on Twitter in a LIVE DISCUSSION with audience interaction and Q&A... To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about? https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22/is-calvinism-all-you-talk-about/ DOWNLOAD OUR APP: LINK FOR ANDROIDS: ... LINK FOR APPLE: ... Go to www.ridgemax.co for all you software development needs! Show them some love for their support of Soteriology101!!! To ORDER Dr. Flowers...
info_outlineSoteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
Alana L is back to address a recent video from Dr. John MacArthur telling her (or those like her) to keep their thoughts to themselves regarding their doubts about Calvinism. Dr. Leighton Flowers doesn't want Alana to keep her thoughts to herself, instead he would like her to share them with our audience on this live episode. JOIN US! Hear Dr. MacArthur tell young women on YouTube who've expressed doubts about Calvinism to keep their thoughts to themselves: https://youtu.be/HpHeSl-8zB0 To hear the first interview with Alana and learn more about her own journey out of...
info_outlineSoteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
Dr. Leighton Flowers plays a clip from a 1972 John MacArthur sermon on the hardening of the heart to contrast it with the claims of Calvinistic doctrine. To listen to MacArthur's full message, go here: To listen to Leighton's presentation on the Nature of man, go here: To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about? https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22/is-calvinism-all-you-talk-about/ DOWNLOAD OUR APP: LINK FOR ANDROIDS: ... LINK...
info_outlineSoteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
Dr. Leighton Flowers responds to Dr. James White's recent broadcast in which White engages with the de-conversion of Derek Webb, a former influential Calvinist. Watch James White's Original Video Here: To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about? https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22/is-calvinism-all-you-talk-about/ DOWNLOAD OUR APP: LINK FOR ANDROIDS: ... LINK FOR APPLE: ... Go to www.ridgemax.co for all you software...
info_outlineSoteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
Dr. Brian Wagner, Instructor of Theology, Church History, and Biblical Languages at Veritas Baptist College, joins Dr. Leighton Flowers to talk about the most common proof texts used by Calvinists to prove theistic determinism (the concept that God decrees whatsoever comes to pass) ---such as Isaiah 46:10; Ephesians 1:11; Ps. 139:16 and Lam. 3:37-38. To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about?...
info_outlineSoteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
Dr. Leighton Flowers engages with a recent clip from the Shepherd's conference #shepcon2023 by Dr. John MacArthur, which is focused on the Remnant, but who are the Remnant in scripture? Are they the unconditionally elected ones of #Calvinism or is it simply a reference to believers? MacArthur rebukes Tim Keller and Andy Stanley for attempting to impact their culture rather than "feeding the sheep" and then says, "We aren't going to accomplish anything that the Lord hasn't already decreed." Let's discuss how John MacArthur's soteriology is impacting his methodologies and the...
info_outlineSoteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
Dr. Leighton Flowers plays a clip from former Calvinistic Christians who are now unbelievers talking about why they left the faith. Tyler Vela's deconversion: Paul Maxwell's deconversion: Megan Phelp's deconversion: Derek Webb's deconversion: To SUPPORT this broadcast, please click here: Subscribe to the Soteriology 101 Newsletter here: www.soteriology101.com/newsletter Is Calvinism all Leighton talks about? https://soteriology101.com/2017/09/22/is-calvinism-all-you-talk-about/ DOWNLOAD OUR APP: LINK FOR ANDROIDS: ... LINK FOR APPLE: ... Go to...
info_outlineSoteriology 101 w/ Dr. Leighton Flowers
Dr. Leighton Flowers talks about the tendencies of every group to produce "cage-stagers" and what we should do about it. Often it’s accused of being marked by a cage-stage (convert others at all costs) but it exists everywhere: “Cage-staggers” in any discipline are marked by a greater love for the practice than the person. Avoiding this stage only comes by means of patience and prayer. We will discuss this post on social media by Brandon Smith: Much like “cage stage” Calvinism was a danger for us excitable young/future pastors and theologians 15 years ago, I hope we are careful...
info_outlineJacob I loved and Esau I hated:
The term “hate” is sometimes an expression of choosing one over another, and does not literally mean “hatred.” For instance, Jesus told Peter, “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:26). No commentator worth his salt would suggest the term “hate” in this passage is literal, otherwise he would be hard pressed to explain scripture’s other teachings about loving and honoring our parents. Instead, this passage is understood to mean that man must choose following God’s will over the will of even the most beloved in one’s life. Could the same hermeneutical principle be applied toward understanding God choice of Jacob over Esau? Certainly, it could. God clearly chose one over the other for a noble purpose, but can we be sure that was Paul’s intent in this passage? No, not entirely, we would have to speculate.
However, do we have to speculate regarding why God expressed such hatred for Esau? God has a purpose for everything He does and though he is not obligated to explain Himself to any of us, He does typically reveal his motives through scripture. He wants his friends to be aware of His work and the purposes behind His decisions (John 15:15). So, what do we know about God’s motive for hating Esau? Is there a cause or a purpose behind this decision that is revealed in scripture? Does God arbitrarily decide to hate some people and love others? Is that Paul’s meaning in this text?
The answer to these questions can be found by unpacking the scriptures Paul refers to in Romans 9. Let’s take a look at each one:
Before Birth?
A hasty reading of Romans 9 could lead some to think God always hated Esau leaving the impression God’s hatred has no evident cause. This is simply untrue. Verse 11 clearly states that God had a purpose for Israel before the twins were born, but not hatred for an unborn child.
“For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth” – Rom 9:11
Nowhere does it state that God hated Esau before he was born. God chose to keep his promise to Abraham through Jacob, not Esau, before they were born, but hatred is never spoken of as being present before their birth. That is presumed or read into the text by some, but it simply never states that.
Also, God’s choice of Jacob over Esau was not kept as a part of “God’s secret counsel,” as many Calvinists teach regarding individual election. Calvinists argue that one of the reasons we must evangelize all men is because we do not know who God has individually selected, yet are we to believe God told the twins mother that He hated her son before he was were even born? God told Rebecca of his elective purpose in an audible voice (Gen. 25:22-23), but nothing is mentioned regarding God’s hating her son.
How horrible would that be? Imagine God telling you that he hated your son before he was even born! It is unthinkable. Upon reading the text carefully it is easily discerned that God only told her that the older will serve the younger:
“when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.” – Rom 9:10, Rom 9:12
Clearly, the prophecy was not about hatred or a curse, it was about God’s elective purpose for Israel. Like anyone else, if Esau had chosen to bless Jacob then he too would have been blessed (Gen. 12:3).
When and Why Did God Hate Esau?
Not only did God not express his hatred for Esau prior to his birth, He did not reveal this until after Esau was dead. Both of the twins were long gone before the house of Esau invoked God’s declaration of hate. The prophecy against Edom, known to be the house of Esau (Gen 36:1, 43), is found in the book of Obadiah. Here we find the true cause of God’s hatred toward these people:
“For thy violence against thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever.” – Obadiah 1:10
Malachi 1:2-3 is the passage Paul references in the hotly contested ninth chapter of Romans. The original passage states:
“I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.” – Mal 1:2-3
Malachi wrote his prophecy hundreds of years after Jacob and Esau lived on earth. Both prophets, Malachi and Obadiah, reflect on Edom’s attacks against Israel throughout their writings giving a very clear cause for God’s declared hatred for Esau and those he represented in Edom.
So, it is clear that in Romans 9 Paul was simply summarizing this historical account by first speaking of God’s prophecy for the twins and the nations they represent, and then revealing the final outcome of Edom’s rebellion and God’s subsequent declaration of hatred. Never once is God’s hatred expressed toward an unborn individual or even against someone who was still living.
Please think about this honestly and compare it with what you have personally come to know about God. Is the concept of God hating people before they are born even reflective of the God revealed in scripture? Are we to believe that the God who calls us to love our enemies hates the unborn?
I John 4:8 teaches, “Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.” Does not your heart stir with righteous anger toward people like those from the Westboro Baptist Church who declares God’s hatred for others? Yet, how is that any different from making the claim that scripture teaches God hates an unborn baby and then deriving a theological system from such teachings which suggests He also hates most of humanity prior to their even being born? Does the spirit inside you resonate at all with such abhorrent claims?
Calvinists seem to think Paul's citation in verse 11 is made at the same time as verse 12, but they are two different references to two different passages...it's more of a Before and After.
Verse 11-12 (ref to Gen): BEFORE they were born God declared the election of Jacob to carry the lineage of the Messiah, over the elder brother, but clearly had Esau or anyone else blessed Jacob they too would be blessed (Gen 12:3)
Verse 13 (ref to Mal): AFTER ...in fact hundreds of years after both twins were long dead God declared his hatred of Esau in reference to Edom's attack on Israelite lands.
Conclusion: God declared his elective choice of Israel before the twins birth to be fulfilled through Jacob, but his hatred for Esau is not declared until long after his death. It is only summarized together by Paul in this chapter leading Calvinists to wrongly think that God's elective purpose and hatred was declared at the same time, before they were born, which is FACTUALLY INACCURATE.
What Paul is demonstrating is that Israel is chosen to carry that promise. He does so in two ways - by demonstrating that Israel (not Esau or the Edomites) was chosen for this and that God's favor remained on them even to the time of the restoration from exile.
God still protected and cared for Esau, giving him Mt. Seir as his inheritance.
Paul is referencing two distinct historical events in Israel's history to prove his point. (He actually continues to do so throughout Romans 9, but that is another discussion.) He is leveraging the stories provided in his history to make his point. You need to look at the broader textual context of his quotes to understand what he is saying.
Modern exegetes have recognized that when Scripture is quoted, the author is using this as a reference to a broader textual and cultural understanding of what is being said. You need to go back and look at the whole discourse.